Caolan McNamara wrote:
On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 20:57 +0100, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Stephan Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
However, some people build OOo in such a way that they use
system-supplied alternatives of those external projects, so that the
patches will have no effect for them. That means that switching on
"warnings are errors" can break such builds (although the "official"
OOo builds would succeed). The relevant patch files, until now, are
boost/boost-1.30.2.patch
boost/spirit-1.6.1.patch
icu/icu-2.6.patch
neon/neon.patch
python/Python-2.3.4.patch
sablot/Sablot-0.52.patch
stlport/STLport-4.0.patch
stlport/STLport-4.5-0119.patch
Add agg to the list.
I guess that for e.g. next version of Fedora, I can go around getting
the warnings free patches for this libraries into at least the distro
versions of these modules so at least a --with-system on fedora > fc5
would work with warnings as errors enabled, and I assume that other
distros could do the same. The problem would be using --with-system-foo
on existing releases :-(
Have you already submitted the "fix warnings" patches for these
libraries into their respective bug tracking systems, so that the next
releases of those libraries themselves will include the warning
fixes :-) ?
No. For one, warnings01 is not yet ready, so chances are that our
current patches are not yet final. For another, some of the external
projects OOo uses are old versions of those projects (e.g., boost,
stlport), so that it is questionable whether upstreaming those patches
would have any benefit. However, upstreaming anything relevant is
definitely something we should consider once warnings01 is stable.
-Stephan
[...]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
